Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 4:30 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Do you think religion is holding society back?
#51
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
(June 28, 2017 at 9:49 am)SteveII Wrote:
(June 27, 2017 at 5:30 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Oh, is that how that happened?  -and here I thought it was some sort of period of enlightenment, where rationality became prominant, on the backs of some sort of, oh..whats the word..renaissance, of classical pagan thinking?  

Turns out the christers opened their bibles and christed all the science into existence.  
Surveying all the world's civilizations up until that point seems to indicate that the Christian worldview was important in the development of modern science. At the very least, it was the most conducive worldview up to that point.
You mean, other than the pagan worldview out of which science arose....the one that didn't burn heretics for doing science - the one that both early christers and later catholics cribbed -their- science from?  

There is no version of history in which christianity can be called a friend or conducive to science.  It was there, resisting science..at every step.  It's still there, resisting science, at every step.  Today, christers like yourself would like to claim what your forefathers attempted to abort as their own baby.  

Sure, now that it's all grown up and christianity looks silly compared to it, you want a piece of the science action. Who wouldn't, but that ship sailed a long, long time ago. Yall had your shot. You blew it. No amount of faithful retconning will change that.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#52
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
(June 28, 2017 at 2:27 pm)Khemikal Wrote:
(June 28, 2017 at 9:49 am)SteveII Wrote:
Surveying all the world's civilizations up until that point seems to indicate that the Christian worldview was important in the development of modern science. At the very least, it was the most conducive worldview up to that point.
You mean, other than the pagan worldview out of which science arose....the one that didn't burn heretics for doing science - the one that both early christers and later catholics cribbed -their- science from?  

There is no version of history in which christianity can be called a friend or conducive to science.  It was there, resisting science..at every step.  It's still there, resisting science, at every step.  Today, christers like yourself would like to claim what your forefathers attempted to abort as their own baby.  

Sure, now that it's all grown up and christianity looks silly compared to it, you want a piece of the science action.  Who wouldn't, but that ship sailed a long, long time ago.  Yall had your shot.  You blew it.  No amount of faithful retconning will change that.

To be fair to Steve, and I already said it in a prior post. EVERY religion has sub sects or families and individuals that hate it when science points away from their club. Try telling a Hindu that eating cow wont cause them to be a lower life in the next life. Try telling a Jew eating pork wont kill them as long as they cook it properly. Even Buddhists have their superstition and to know that just travel through Asia. Some sects of Muslims and Jews require you to be buried within 24 hours. That is stupid if your loved one is murdered and you want law to find the killer. The ME cant determine a cause of death in that short period of time.

Most of the world's population simply buys the religions of their parents, but to say only Christianity is the only one that holds science back is absurd. Humans in general simply don't like their social norms upset and any religious person or sect or family will get upset if you tell them science does not match their superstitions.
Reply
#53
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
(June 28, 2017 at 2:27 pm)Khemikal Wrote:
(June 28, 2017 at 9:49 am)SteveII Wrote:
Surveying all the world's civilizations up until that point seems to indicate that the Christian worldview was important in the development of modern science. At the very least, it was the most conducive worldview up to that point.
You mean, other than the pagan worldview out of which science arose....the one that didn't burn heretics for doing science - the one that both early christers and later catholics cribbed -their- science from?  

There is no version of history in which christianity can be called a friend or conducive to science.  It was there, resisting science..at every step.  It's still there, resisting science, at every step.  Today, christers like yourself would like to claim what your forefathers attempted to abort as their own baby.  

Sure, now that it's all grown up and christianity looks silly compared to it, you want a piece of the science action.  Who wouldn't, but that ship sailed a long, long time ago.  Yall had your shot.  You blew it.  No amount of faithful retconning will change that.

No, not at all.

A pagan worldview couldn't (and didn't) foster the move to modern science. Pagans thought the world was endowed with spiritual aspects--events and conditions were caused by spiritual forces. As such, a careful examination of natural causes was not a natural extension of that worldview--not in the least. This is the same reason that modern science did not develop in Asia or India--where there were plenty of stable societies that would otherwise have been able to foster scientific pursuits. 

It is only a worldview that held that the universe existed with a natural order and did not hold any special unseen properties, that would prompt large numbers to attempt to explain it. The only worldview anywhere near the timeframe of the rise of science that met that description was Christianity. 

The perpetuated myth that Christianity was a foe of science is silly and unfounded. Show me where there was any systematic design/desire/process to hold science back. You certainly can't deny that most early scientist were Christians of some stripe--so how could "Christianity" have been a foe when the label applied to the people doing the science?
Reply
#54
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
(June 28, 2017 at 3:10 pm)SteveII Wrote:
(June 28, 2017 at 2:27 pm)Khemikal Wrote: You mean, other than the pagan worldview out of which science arose....the one that didn't burn heretics for doing science - the one that both early christers and later catholics cribbed -their- science from?  

There is no version of history in which christianity can be called a friend or conducive to science.  It was there, resisting science..at every step.  It's still there, resisting science, at every step.  Today, christers like yourself would like to claim what your forefathers attempted to abort as their own baby.  

Sure, now that it's all grown up and christianity looks silly compared to it, you want a piece of the science action.  Who wouldn't, but that ship sailed a long, long time ago.  Yall had your shot.  You blew it.  No amount of faithful retconning will change that.

No, not at all.

A pagan worldview couldn't (and didn't) foster the move to modern science. Pagans thought the world was endowed with spiritual aspects--events and conditions were caused by spiritual forces.

As such, a careful examination of natural causes was not a natural extension of that worldview--not in the least. This is the same reason that modern science did not develop in Asia or India--where there were plenty of stable societies that would otherwise have been able to foster scientific pursuits. 

It is only a worldview that held that the universe existed with a natural order and did not hold any special unseen properties, that would prompt large numbers to attempt to explain it. The only worldview anywhere near the timeframe of the rise of science that met that description was Christianity. 
No...they didn't.  That would be the christers who supplanted and then exterminated them...only later realizing "hey, those fuckers were onto something".  Your summary, above..was just another myth that the christers told about the people they annihilated.  The truth of the matter, is that the pagans were the intellectuals and the christers the backwoods ignorants...the heathens.

The emergence and rise of christianity was a -disaster- for science, and the world.  


Quote:The perpetuated myth that Christianity was a foe of science is silly and unfounded. Show me where there was any systematic design/desire/process to hold science back. You certainly can't deny that most early scientist were Christians of some stripe--so how could "Christianity" have been a foe when the label applied to the people doing the science?
-and there we have it.  Christianity didn't do shit.  You're just hoping that you can grift some credibility from the unfortunate fact that some scientists were christians.  Well..maybe if they hadn't actively exterminated the folks who weren't christians......that would have been different.  Like it was -before- there were christians.

Jerkoff

Hey, look...none of what those christers did -has- to be your problem today. I mean, unless you make it your problem by bullshitting yourself and anyone within earshot about the history of jesusism and science.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#55
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
(June 28, 2017 at 3:18 pm)Khemikal Wrote:
(June 28, 2017 at 3:10 pm)SteveII Wrote: No, not at all.

A pagan worldview couldn't (and didn't) foster the move to modern science. Pagans thought the world was endowed with spiritual aspects--events and conditions were caused by spiritual forces.

As such, a careful examination of natural causes was not a natural extension of that worldview--not in the least. This is the same reason that modern science did not develop in Asia or India--where there were plenty of stable societies that would otherwise have been able to foster scientific pursuits. 

It is only a worldview that held that the universe existed with a natural order and did not hold any special unseen properties, that would prompt large numbers to attempt to explain it. The only worldview anywhere near the timeframe of the rise of science that met that description was Christianity. 
No...they didn't.  That would be the christers who supplanted and then exterminated them...only later realizing "hey, those fuckers were onto something".  Your summary, above..was just another myth that the christers told about the people they annihilated.  The truth of the matter, is that the pagans were the intellectuals and the christers the backwoods ignorants...the heathens.

The emergence and rise of christianity was a -disaster- for science, and the world.  


Quote:The perpetuated myth that Christianity was a foe of science is silly and unfounded. Show me where there was any systematic design/desire/process to hold science back. You certainly can't deny that most early scientist were Christians of some stripe--so how could "Christianity" have been a foe when the label applied to the people doing the science?
-and there we have it.  Christianity didn't do shit.  You're just hoping that you can grift some credibility from the unfortunate fact that some scientists were christians.  Well..maybe if they hadn't actively exterminated the folks who weren't christians......that would have been different.  Like it was -before- there were christians.

Jerkoff

So...no backup for your claims--just rephrasing them. Must be nice to invent a reality specifically to address a debate question. It's really hard to rebut such an imagination. Congrats on the winning strategy.
Reply
#56
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
I doubt that discussing christian scientists and their contributions is going to help your case...but sure, let;s take a slice.

What of newton, and his physics?  How about Gregor Mendel, a monk who described the laws of inheritance - the beginning of genetics? Carl Linnaeus, the father of taxonomy?  Darwin....purportedly a christian (or at least that's what christians like to tell us as though we will suddenly convert).  All of them living in the "conducive" atmosphere of christian hegemony.

What do christers think of their combined works?  What is the conducive response of jesusism to these men and their godly endeavor?  Denial.

Physics tells us that magic book is a collection of fairy tales and just so stories. Genetics, that were are evolved..not created. Taxonomy shows our relationship to all other life, and natural selection provides the mechanism by which we all became what we are. What, however, would the christers then or now...think about the modern synthesis? The same thing, in both cases.....and it aint "conducive". I'm glad that you've stopped burning people alive and ransacking libraries...but I suspect that has more to do with your ability than your desires.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#57
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
SteveII
Quote:...Show me where the actual policy of the church was to curtail scientific discovery--

For the 17th century church to have a recognisable policy regarding science they would first have to acknowledge the existence of science. They didn't, how could they? The church didn't reject Galileo's proposals because of some flaw in his calculations, the church didn't have the remotest idea what he was talking about. The collective mindset of the church was completely polarized, you are either for us or against us. At the first hint of a proposal being in conflict with scripture, all debate ends, the old 'repent or burn' now becomes 'retract or burn'.


Quote:or in the absence of that, show me where a series of organized events were unmistakably designed to do so. <...>

Well they did take great delight in this sort of thing:

[Image: heretics8-1024x831.jpg]
It's amazing 'science' always seems to 'find' whatever it is funded for, and never the oppsite. Drich.
Reply
#58
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
(June 28, 2017 at 3:32 pm)Khemikal Wrote: I doubt that discussing christian scientists and their contributions is going to help your case...but sure, let;s take a slice.

What of newton, and his physics?  How about Gregor Mendel, a monk who described the laws of inheritance - the beginning of genetics? Carl Linnaeus, the father of taxonomy?  Darwin....purportedly a christian (or at least that's what christians like to tell us as though we will suddenly convert).  All of them living in the "conducive" atmosphere of christian hegemony.

What do christers think of their combined works?  What is the conducive response of jesusism to these men and their godly endeavor?  Denial.

Physics tells us that magic book is a collection of fairy tales and just so stories. Genetics, that were are evolved..not created.  Taxonomy shows our relationship to all other life, and natural selection provides the mechanism by which we all became what we are.  What, however, would the christers then or now...think about the modern synthesis?  The same thing, in both cases.....and it aint "conducive".  I'm glad that you've stopped burning people alive and ransacking libraries...but I suspect that has more to do with your ability than your desires.

Not quite what I was arguing...my only post in this thread before your comment said "Christianity was instrumental in the early progress of modern science". You just provided support for that claim so I will move on to your other assertion. 

Setting aside the fact that physics can not tell us anything about the NT miracles, the rest is just a straw man writ large. You are turning a small minority's opinion on evolution (one tiny segment of science in fact) into a sweeping conclusion that Christianity opposing science. Entirely disingenuous. I bet even most atheists would stumble over themselves to distance themselves from this nonsense.

(June 28, 2017 at 4:01 pm)Succubus Wrote: SteveII
Quote:...Show me where the actual policy of the church was to curtail scientific discovery--

For the 17th century church to have a recognisable policy regarding science they would first have to acknowledge the existence of science. They didn't, how could they? The church didn't reject Galileo's proposals because of some flaw in his calculations, the church didn't have the remotest idea what he was talking about. The collective mindset of the church was completely polarized, you are either for us or against us. At the first hint of a proposal being in conflict with scripture, all debate ends, the old 'repent or burn' now becomes 'retract or burn'.


Quote:or in the absence of that, show me where a series of organized events were unmistakably designed to do so. <...>

Well they did take great delight in this sort of thing:

[Image: heretics8-1024x831.jpg]

Exactly what scientist did who burn and for what reason? Please...I want to know. 

Ugh. Atheist...always blindly following any stupid argument they hear to support their case. The supposed conflict between science and religion is a recent invention. 

Reference: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_an..._1210-1277
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_thesis

Selections from the latter article above:
Quote:The "conflict thesis" is a historiographical approach in the history of science which maintains that there is an intrinsic intellectual conflict between religion and science and that the relationship between religion and science inevitably leads to public hostility. The thesis retains support among some scientists and in the public,[1] while most historians of science do not support the original strict form of the thesis.

In the mid to late 1800s - The scientist John William Draper and the writer Andrew Dickson White were the most influential exponents of the conflict thesis between religion and science. [Pretty much started the myth]

Quote:Historians of science today have moved away from a conflict model, which is based mainly on two historical episodes (those involving Galileo and Darwin) in favor of a "complexity" model, because religious figures took positions on both sides of each dispute and there was no overall aim by any party involved in discrediting religion.[17] Biologist Stephen Jay Gould said: "White's and Draper's accounts of the actual interaction between science and religion in Western history do not differ greatly. Both tell a tale of bright progress continually sparked by science. And both develop and use the same myths to support their narrative, the flat-earth legend prominently among them".[18] In a summary of the historiography of the conflict thesis, Colin A. Russell, the former President of Christians in Science, said that "Draper takes such liberty with history, perpetuating legends as fact that he is rightly avoided today in serious historical study. The same is nearly as true of White, though his prominent apparatus of prolific footnotes may create a misleading impression of meticulous scholarship".[19]
Quote:In Science & Religion, Gary Ferngren proposes a complex relationship between religion and science:

While some historians had always regarded the Draper-White thesis as oversimplifying and distorting a complex relationship, in the late twentieth century it underwent a more systematic reevaluation. The result is the growing recognition among historians of science that the relationship of religion and science has been much more positive than is sometimes thought. Although popular images of controversy continue to exemplify the supposed hostility of Christianity to new scientific theories, studies have shown that Christianity has often nurtured and encouraged scientific endeavour, while at other times the two have co-existed without either tension or attempts at harmonization. If Galileo and the Scopes trial come to mind as examples of conflict, they were the exceptions rather than the rule.[20]

and last but not least...(my bold so you don't miss it)

Quote:Some modern historians of science (such as Peter Barker, Bernard R. Goldstein, and Crosbie Smith) propose that scientific discoveries - such as Kepler's laws of planetary motion in the 17th century, and the reformulation of physics in terms of energy, in the 19th century - were driven by religion.[21] Religious organizations and clerics figure prominently in the broad histories of science, until the professionalization of the scientific enterprise, in the 19th century, led to tensions between scholars taking religious and secular approaches to nature.[22] Even the prominent examples of religion's apparent conflict with science, the Galileo affair (1614) and the Scopes trial (1925), were not pure instances of conflict between science and religion, but included personal and political facts in the development of each conflict.[23]
Reply
#59
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
(June 28, 2017 at 4:12 pm)SteveII Wrote:
(June 28, 2017 at 3:32 pm)Khemikal Wrote: I doubt that discussing christian scientists and their contributions is going to help your case...but sure, let;s take a slice.

What of newton, and his physics?  How about Gregor Mendel, a monk who described the laws of inheritance - the beginning of genetics? Carl Linnaeus, the father of taxonomy?  Darwin....purportedly a christian (or at least that's what christians like to tell us as though we will suddenly convert).  All of them living in the "conducive" atmosphere of christian hegemony.

What do christers think of their combined works?  What is the conducive response of jesusism to these men and their godly endeavor?  Denial.

Physics tells us that magic book is a collection of fairy tales and just so stories. Genetics, that were are evolved..not created.  Taxonomy shows our relationship to all other life, and natural selection provides the mechanism by which we all became what we are.  What, however, would the christers then or now...think about the modern synthesis?  The same thing, in both cases.....and it aint "conducive".  I'm glad that you've stopped burning people alive and ransacking libraries...but I suspect that has more to do with your ability than your desires.

Not quite what I was arguing...my only post in this thread before your comment said "Christianity was instrumental in the early progress of modern science". You just provided support for that claim so I will move on to your other assertion. 

Setting aside the fact that physics can not tell us anything about the NT miracles, the rest is just a straw man writ large. You are turning a small minority's opinion on evolution (one tiny segment of science in fact) into a sweeping conclusion that Christianity opposing science. Entirely disingenuous. I bet even most atheists would stumble over themselves to distance themselves from this nonsense.

(June 28, 2017 at 4:01 pm)Succubus Wrote: SteveII

For the 17th century church to have a recognisable policy regarding science they would first have to acknowledge the existence of science. They didn't, how could they? The church didn't reject Galileo's proposals because of some flaw in his calculations, the church didn't have the remotest idea what he was talking about. The collective mindset of the church was completely polarized, you are either for us or against us. At the first hint of a proposal being in conflict with scripture, all debate ends, the old 'repent or burn' now becomes 'retract or burn'.



Well they did take great delight in this sort of thing:

[Image: heretics8-1024x831.jpg]

Exactly what scientist did who burn and for what reason? Please...I want to know. 

Ugh. Atheist...always blindly following any stupid argument they hear to support their case. The supposed conflict between science and religion is a recent invention. 

Reference: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_an..._1210-1277
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_thesis

Selections from the latter article above:
Quote:The "conflict thesis" is a historiographical approach in the history of science which maintains that there is an intrinsic intellectual conflict between religion and science and that the relationship between religion and science inevitably leads to public hostility. The thesis retains support among some scientists and in the public,[1] while most historians of science do not support the original strict form of the thesis.

In the mid to late 1800s - The scientist John William Draper and the writer Andrew Dickson White were the most influential exponents of the conflict thesis between religion and science. [Pretty much started the myth]

Quote:Historians of science today have moved away from a conflict model, which is based mainly on two historical episodes (those involving Galileo and Darwin) in favor of a "complexity" model, because religious figures took positions on both sides of each dispute and there was no overall aim by any party involved in discrediting religion.[17] Biologist Stephen Jay Gould said: "White's and Draper's accounts of the actual interaction between science and religion in Western history do not differ greatly. Both tell a tale of bright progress continually sparked by science. And both develop and use the same myths to support their narrative, the flat-earth legend prominently among them".[18] In a summary of the historiography of the conflict thesis, Colin A. Russell, the former President of Christians in Science, said that "Draper takes such liberty with history, perpetuating legends as fact that he is rightly avoided today in serious historical study. The same is nearly as true of White, though his prominent apparatus of prolific footnotes may create a misleading impression of meticulous scholarship".[19]
Quote:In Science & Religion, Gary Ferngren proposes a complex relationship between religion and science:

While some historians had always regarded the Draper-White thesis as oversimplifying and distorting a complex relationship, in the late twentieth century it underwent a more systematic reevaluation. The result is the growing recognition among historians of science that the relationship of religion and science has been much more positive than is sometimes thought. Although popular images of controversy continue to exemplify the supposed hostility of Christianity to new scientific theories, studies have shown that Christianity has often nurtured and encouraged scientific endeavour, while at other times the two have co-existed without either tension or attempts at harmonization. If Galileo and the Scopes trial come to mind as examples of conflict, they were the exceptions rather than the rule.[20]

and last but not least...(my bold so you don't miss it)

Quote:Some modern historians of science (such as Peter Barker, Bernard R. Goldstein, and Crosbie Smith) propose that scientific discoveries - such as Kepler's laws of planetary motion in the 17th century, and the reformulation of physics in terms of energy, in the 19th century - were driven by religion.[21] Religious organizations and clerics figure prominently in the broad histories of science, until the professionalization of the scientific enterprise, in the 19th century, led to tensions between scholars taking religious and secular approaches to nature.[22] Even the prominent examples of religion's apparent conflict with science, the Galileo affair (1614) and the Scopes trial (1925), were not pure instances of conflict between science and religion, but included personal and political facts in the development of each conflict.[23]

Okay, I've read all I need to on this page and it would be a waste of time ripping apart your nonsense. How the fuck are you alive? You literally should have walked into traffic or forgotten how to breathe, this is the level of stupidity and denial of reality you're expressing here. If I stuck you in a room with a psychiatrist, told them "I think there's something wrong with them" and you told them everything you just told me, you'd be in a straightjacket and wouldn't be able to do a thing to convince them that there's been some kind of mistake. Why are you so incapable of realizing how alarming your lack of intelligence is to the rest of us? You think it makes me happy telling you how badly you're damaging the human species as a whole? It's goddamned exasperating! You're the kind of jackass the fairweather idiots point to and say, "We're not those fundamentalist idiots, don't lump us in with them!" Grow the fuck up, repair the damage the people who lied to you did to your brain, and make something useful of yourself.
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?

---

There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
Reply
#60
RE: Do you think religion is holding society back?
(June 28, 2017 at 4:12 pm)SteveII Wrote: Not quite what I was arguing...my only post in this thread before your comment said "Christianity was instrumental in the early progress of modern science". You just provided support for that claim so I will move on to your other assertion. 
It takes a christer to see support for your assertion in anything I wrote.  

Quote:Setting aside the fact that physics can not tell us anything about the NT miracles, the rest is just a straw man writ large. You are turning a small minority's opinion on evolution (one tiny segment of science in fact) into a sweeping conclusion that Christianity opposing science. Entirely disingenuous. I bet even most atheists would stumble over themselves to distance themselves from this nonsense.
-as I said.  Denial. Denial then, denial now. The only difference being that now, denial doesn't come with an added side of execution or excommunication. Well, thanks for doing the bare minimum of not killing people anymore, I guess. I can see how, had that continued to be packaged with the denial, science may have never made the comeback that it did.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  You think Buddhism is pro intellectualism? Woah0 5 632 September 6, 2022 at 11:09 pm
Last Post: Anomalocaris
Exclamation Why Atheism is Incoherent & You Aren't as Smart as You Think You Are Seax 60 4683 March 19, 2021 at 9:43 am
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  Do you think Scientology sells anyone on its belief? Sweden83 19 1693 December 25, 2020 at 8:34 pm
Last Post: Smaug
  To all religions/What makes you think...... Brian37 22 2703 February 26, 2019 at 8:46 am
Last Post: no one
  How you know religion has done its job in brainwashing you: Foxaèr 19 2694 August 9, 2018 at 12:47 am
Last Post: purplepurpose
  What do you think prayer is? vulcanlogician 44 5926 February 2, 2018 at 4:12 pm
Last Post: emjay
  Do you think aliens made us Roberto 73 11515 January 25, 2018 at 5:30 am
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  Really makes you think Astonished 7 1926 September 25, 2017 at 12:28 am
Last Post: Astonished
  Do you think that this old hag considers herself a Good Christian? NuclearEnergy 9 2589 July 22, 2017 at 11:54 pm
Last Post: ignoramus
  What do you think of this argument for God? SuperSentient 140 18640 March 19, 2017 at 1:19 pm
Last Post: RoadRunner79



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)